2006
DOI: 10.1007/11774303_86
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Automated Vocabulary Instruction in a Reading Tutor

Abstract: This paper presents a within-subject, randomized experiment to compare automated interventions for teaching vocabulary to young readers using Project LISTEN's Reading Tutor. The experiment compared three conditions: no explicit instruction, a quick definition, and a quick definition plus a poststory battery of extended instruction based on a published instructional sequence for human teachers. A month long study with elementary school children indicates that the quick instruction, which lasts about seven secon… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…( 2 With these help methods, their efficiency should be measured so that they can be improved better in the future. Reading Tutor [6] has provided a good method-random test: 20 groups of users are randomly offered different methods of help, and the most popular method and the least effective method are summarized at the end of the experiment. In the future, the most popular method will be utilized widely, and the least effective method will be improved.…”
Section: Feedbackmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…( 2 With these help methods, their efficiency should be measured so that they can be improved better in the future. Reading Tutor [6] has provided a good method-random test: 20 groups of users are randomly offered different methods of help, and the most popular method and the least effective method are summarized at the end of the experiment. In the future, the most popular method will be utilized widely, and the least effective method will be improved.…”
Section: Feedbackmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The author uses a ten-fold crossvalidation, dividing the students randomly into ten disjoint sets, as illustrated in Figure 2. App trains on nine sets, tests on the held-out set, repeats this procedure for each set, and averages the results (Heiner, 2004). We evaluate the model by comparing the average results with those obtained from the models.…”
Section: Embedded Experiments and Evaluationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many sources of knowledge have been utilized in order to help children learn vocabulary, including machine-readable dictionaries and thesauruses such as WordNet (Fellbaum 1998), pictures and sounds for concrete vocabulary, and explanations of words in terms of other words. While other work on tutoring reading (Aist 2001, 2002; Brown, Frishkoff and Eskenazi 2005; Heiner, Beck and Mostow 2006) has explored some of these other resources, VEGEMATIC focuses on providing additional contexts to help students learn the meaning of words, and thus VEGEMATIC is most related to prior work on generation and selection of example sentences.…”
Section: Relation To Prior Workmentioning
confidence: 99%